dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
9
share rss forum feed


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to Fuzzy285

Re: If TekSavvi doesn't fight on Jan 14th, I'm leaving them.

said by Fuzzy285:

said by koreyb:

All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws

Could you please point us to what the new mandatory time is for data retention? I'm having trouble finding anything other than references to it being discussed as part of the upcoming notice to notice system.

I've asked him for this also and i was never answered. There is no minimum. This is giving the wrong and incorrect information out to people.

Also have a read: »www.techdirt.com/articles/201212···ll.shtml

Fuzzy285

join:2012-12-12

3 recommendations

Interesting read, even in my eggnog induced stupor.
There's a lot of misconceptions and misinformation flying around. I'm not a lawyer, but this is what my reading of the changes to the Copyright Act tell me:

For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while.

Also, people seem to think they are not being sued yet. Wrong. The John Doe statement of claim was filed with federal court November 14, 2012. According to Federal Court rules, Voltage has 60 days, not counting holidays, to serve the John/Jane Doe defendants. The purpose of the Motion involving Teksavvy that was to be heard Dec/17 was just so that they can effect service against those defendants. In other words, as soon as TSI releases those names/addresses, Voltage willl be serving people. There's no need to file another, separate Statement of Claim, as far as I know. Once served (can be done by mail), a defendant has 30 days to file a defense. Those who don't file a defense risk having default judgement granted against them.

People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. Only after you defend yourself will Voltage offer any form of settlement or choose to discontinue.

People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period, otherwise many anonymous VPN providers wouldn't be located in Canada. What TSI can't do is destroy the logs they already have once they are notified of infringement. And they have to retain them for up to a year for those included in the notification.

People think they are not affected if they didn't get a notice until now or if they are with a different ISP. Not true, these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors.

Now, back to the eggnog.


cynic10

join:2011-02-05

1 edit

Bravo. Thx you for summarizing it and going straight to the points. Some parts escaped me until this posts, especially these parts which are highly important.

"For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while."

"People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period"

"People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. "

" these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors."


funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to Tx

said by Tx:

said by Fuzzy285:

said by koreyb:

All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws

Could you please point us to what the new mandatory time is for data retention? I'm having trouble finding anything other than references to it being discussed as part of the upcoming notice to notice system.

I've asked him for this also and i was never answered. There is no minimum. This is giving the wrong and incorrect information out to people.

Also have a read: »www.techdirt.com/articles/201212···ll.shtml

marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to Fuzzy285

said by Fuzzy285:

Interesting read, even in my eggnog induced stupor.
There's a lot of misconceptions and misinformation flying around. I'm not a lawyer, but this is what my reading of the changes to the Copyright Act tell me:

For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while.

Also, people seem to think they are not being sued yet. Wrong. The John Doe statement of claim was filed with federal court November 14, 2012. According to Federal Court rules, Voltage has 60 days, not counting holidays, to serve the John/Jane Doe defendants. The purpose of the Motion involving Teksavvy that was to be heard Dec/17 was just so that they can effect service against those defendants. In other words, as soon as TSI releases those names/addresses, Voltage willl be serving people. There's no need to file another, separate Statement of Claim, as far as I know. Once served (can be done by mail), a defendant has 30 days to file a defense. Those who don't file a defense risk having default judgement granted against them.

People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. Only after you defend yourself will Voltage offer any form of settlement or choose to discontinue.

People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period, otherwise many anonymous VPN providers wouldn't be located in Canada. What TSI can't do is destroy the logs they already have once they are notified of infringement. And they have to retain them for up to a year for those included in the notification.

People think they are not affected if they didn't get a notice until now or if they are with a different ISP. Not true, these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors.

Now, back to the eggnog.

thats the rub the notice rules haven't been formalized on how hte govt wants it done , AND instead of going ot the govt and saying they want this done NOW or soon or wait they jumped the gun and tried to bypass that part. NOW they even borked the part about non commercial and commercial up and ill say it this should get tossed UTTERLY and to the rails...too much of this "evidence" has no proof that any commercial aspects could have been done. SO in that regard i'd say in my opinion your name and address mean zero other hten to try and find a numb nut dummy that has no clue and threaten them....that actually is extortion when you dont have any right to be doing it as well as black mail.

these goons called voltage better be careful.hackers already outed all there details.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to funny0

said by funny0:

marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits.

Absolutely agree... ideally i'd like to see an ISP with 14 days. It's a good diagnostic time, but 30 days as you said would be fair.

Marc i know answered it and that's the issue is that koreyb keeps saying there is a minimum by law which is false and curious where he is getting his info.

He's been asked by a few people now.

morisato

join:2008-03-16
Oshawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·ELECTRONICBOX

1 recommendation

while i am all for privacy the reasons most of you have are Poor, You want license to Steal and have low chance of getting caught I really Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered
--
Every time Someone leaves Sympatico an Angel gets its wings.



Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed

said by morisato:

while i am all for privacy the reasons most of you have are Poor, You want license to Steal and have low chance of getting caught I really Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered

lol the dead guy in the states said the same thing when he got a letter "not in error" about his activities.

You know, they're never wrong and it is after all a license to "steal" lol...

You people that keep saying that have no clue what theft is. You aren't stealing an item, the content still exists where it was, it's not theft, it's not stealing. Good lord people are so high on their pedestals they don't even know the difference.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
reply to morisato

said by morisato:

Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered

Sigh... this is what people have been talking about for ages. Let's say you have been notified in error. How much time and money can you afford to spend to prove this? From another thread (my words):

Oddly enough, I think the most vocal people in the threads have not received a letter. I haven't (a-not a TSI customer, b-don't use torrents). However, I know the danger of fishing expeditions like this and hate to think that Voltage could possibly make more money with sending out threatening letters than they did by making movies.

It's been stated over and over, but an innocent person fighting could spend more money than the possible extortion letters could ask for. That's fine for some that can afford to fight, but what about those that can't. Also, any that do pay up just make it more likely they'll do it again, to a larger group.

I've seen a couple of numbers thrown around that says at least 2% of the original people ID'd were incorrect. That doesn't even take into account that some of the IPs may not have been provided correctly in the first place. This is from an ISP that is taking care to make sure those identifications were correct.

Take Rogers, or Cogeco, or Bell... will they be as concerned with getting the identifications correct? If you have an issue with the identification will they be responding promptly to help you. * So, let's see - a million identifications (that's what they claim they have). Could be 20,000 people getting sued under false pretenses. Could be another group that haven't done what they're being accused of... it gets messy.

It's sad really as the media companies likely are spending a fortune to try and stop the process. Research, better licensing, finding a better method to distribute, and everyone might win.

ETA: * sorry I meant to add that ~3 years ago (& 2) I got a notification from Cogeco that definitely wasn't me. A very helpful person in their security department did at least help with an explanation


Adding in, I was lucky that someone at Cogeco looked into it and answered my questions. You think they would be as helpful if a couple of thousand people were asking at once? If you're innocent and they demand say $1000 to drop the suit, could you afford to spend $5000 proving them wrong in court? Remember, as quick as you're ready to throw all people receiving notices as guilty - in front of a judge it's not like a criminal case. They would provide their evidence, your IP/name from TSI, you would say you didn't do it, and it's almost a slam dunk they judge would just assume you're lying.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to Tx

said by Tx:

said by funny0:

marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits.

Absolutely agree... ideally i'd like to see an ISP with 14 days. It's a good diagnostic time, but 30 days as you said would be fair.

Marc i know answered it and that's the issue is that koreyb keeps saying there is a minimum by law which is false and curious where he is getting his info.

He's been asked by a few people now.

i think a month is ok why? cause you pay for hte month so a month and ill add stretch to two so you can get patterns seen on traffic and allow ones self for techy reasons to do stuff like upgrades...
you dont need ot keep specific ip info to know patterns and make a nice chart of area specific traffic

webalizer can do that wihtout saying its so an so's ip ...so whats the big deal?

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to A Lurker

said by A Lurker:

said by morisato:

Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered

Sigh... this is what people have been talking about for ages. Let's say you have been notified in error. How much time and money can you afford to spend to prove this? From another thread (my words):

Oddly enough, I think the most vocal people in the threads have not received a letter. I haven't (a-not a TSI customer, b-don't use torrents). However, I know the danger of fishing expeditions like this and hate to think that Voltage could possibly make more money with sending out threatening letters than they did by making movies.

It's been stated over and over, but an innocent person fighting could spend more money than the possible extortion letters could ask for. That's fine for some that can afford to fight, but what about those that can't. Also, any that do pay up just make it more likely they'll do it again, to a larger group.

I've seen a couple of numbers thrown around that says at least 2% of the original people ID'd were incorrect. That doesn't even take into account that some of the IPs may not have been provided correctly in the first place. This is from an ISP that is taking care to make sure those identifications were correct.

Take Rogers, or Cogeco, or Bell... will they be as concerned with getting the identifications correct? If you have an issue with the identification will they be responding promptly to help you. * So, let's see - a million identifications (that's what they claim they have). Could be 20,000 people getting sued under false pretenses. Could be another group that haven't done what they're being accused of... it gets messy.

It's sad really as the media companies likely are spending a fortune to try and stop the process. Research, better licensing, finding a better method to distribute, and everyone might win.

ETA: * sorry I meant to add that ~3 years ago (& 2) I got a notification from Cogeco that definitely wasn't me. A very helpful person in their security department did at least help with an explanation


Adding in, I was lucky that someone at Cogeco looked into it and answered my questions. You think they would be as helpful if a couple of thousand people were asking at once? If you're innocent and they demand say $1000 to drop the suit, could you afford to spend $5000 proving them wrong in court? Remember, as quick as you're ready to throw all people receiving notices as guilty - in front of a judge it's not like a criminal case. They would provide their evidence, your IP/name from TSI, you would say you didn't do it, and it's almost a slam dunk they judge would just assume you're lying.

WRONG if this were properly filed as a non commercial infringment as its under 7 grand poor people can acquire legal aid , then the only people paying are you the tax payers for allowing such retarded copyright laws . THINK OF THAT as PUNISHMENT for being a dumb ass conservative voter.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N

said by funny0:

WRONG if this were properly filed as a non commercial infringment as its under 7 grand poor people can acquire legal aid , then the only people paying are you the tax payers for allowing such retarded copyright laws . THINK OF THAT as PUNISHMENT for being a dumb ass conservative voter.

First, how much should people who don't qualify for legal aid pay to prove their innocence? Should they use up their savings, cash out RRSPs, put a 2nd mortgage on the house?

As for the Liberals, everyone is deluded if you really think they would have done much different. If they gain power in the next election do you really think they'll get rid of anything that the Conservatives do? Ha!!

Chrétien promised to get rid of the GST when he was running in 1993, but never did so when elected. So, I wouldn't believe the Liberals on the copyright issue either. All politicians lie really.

(also, didn't vote for Harper)

cowwoc

join:2007-05-19
St John'S, NL
reply to Fuzzy285

said by Fuzzy285:

People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. Only after you defend yourself will Voltage offer any form of settlement or choose to discontinue.

I've read in a couple of places that because the penalty is capped at $5000 that the suing company must go to small claims court. If that is indeed the case, it won't cover the defendant much of anything.

The question remains: is the suing company allowed to bring this to a normal court? Or are they required to bring it to small-claims court?

Thanks,
Gili

FatBastid

join:2012-12-27
Toronto, ON

You can't. Small Claims only allows payments of money or return of personal property, which are not the remedies being sought by Voltage (statutory damages + punitive damages + a declaration from defendants), you'd have to respond to their claim and quash those portions before asking that it be moved to Small Claims, but by then the federal court judge might as well rule on the merit of the rest of the claim. They need to rewrite the law to allow respondants to file a simple defense saying that in the absence of proof of commercial infringement that those portions of the claim should be denied and that the venue should be moved to Small Claims regarding the balance of the claim. That would definitely take the wind off the sails of the trolls.


cowwoc

join:2007-05-19
St John'S, NL

said by FatBastid:

You can't. Small Claims only allows payments of money or return of personal property, which are not the remedies being sought by Voltage (statutory damages + punitive damages + a declaration from defendants), you'd have to respond to their claim and quash those portions before asking that it be moved to Small Claims, but by then the federal court judge might as well rule on the merit of the rest of the claim. They need to rewrite the law to allow respondants to file a simple defense saying that in the absence of proof of commercial infringement that those portions of the claim should be denied and that the venue should be moved to Small Claims regarding the balance of the claim. That would definitely take the wind off the sails of the trolls.

Okay. So what happens if you opt to represent yourself in court? Do individuals really run the risk of a judge labeling such infringement as commercial without any proof?

Alternatively, couldn't the plaintiffs opt to use the same law firm in exchange for lower hourly fees? This would be similar to a class-action lawsuit but in reverse.

Gili

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to Tx

said by Tx:

said by funny0:

marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits.

Absolutely agree... ideally i'd like to see an ISP with 14 days. It's a good diagnostic time, but 30 days as you said would be fair.

Marc i know answered it and that's the issue is that koreyb keeps saying there is a minimum by law which is false and curious where he is getting his info.

He's been asked by a few people now.

i checke dup on that min law stuff and had vic toews got his way that was a part of it. and it might be why a lot of isps started keeping longer laws not thinking that law would get the boot. NOW you have voltage taking advantage of it before possibly people get smart and start dropping more logs.

HERES my question then if i run a network and you get my ip , does that mean i show up prove i have a network and then tell you to screw off? playing the isp card cause i dont keep any logs?

haha they say they get protection under new law then people running home networks would too then....where is that section of law lets look at it.